I am still getting familiar with OpenFoam/Simscale. One thing that I believe would be very useful is to create multiple operations for one mesh. For example, use a Mesh Local Refinement operation for increased resolution in certain areas of interest. Then, perhaps the interest becomes adding a second operation that incorporates layer refinements to pay more attention to areas near a wall. These operations are both useful and essential to keep the mesh effective and the cell count as minimum as possible. Is there such capability available already?

great input! This is something that will be possible moving forward - right now, a similar workflow can be achieved but the mesh is computed each time entirely. How you would do this right now is - say, you’re looking into generating a tet-mesh with certain refined regions. So you’d use the “Tet mesh with refinements” operations without any local refinements and then generate it. Once generated, you could see the overall mesh fineness. Once you’re happy with that, you add local refinements to the same mesh operation and re-run it. This will recompute the mesh with your added refinements. So that way you can work iteratively as well, but each time on the same operation.

We’re right now working on improving the overall meshing workflow, where similar concepts as you explained are currently being considered.

Thanks for the response. I was hoping that maybe a way around it was to import a mesh done with specific local refinements into another mesh and in that new mesh add the layer refinement operation. Now I understand the function of importing a mesh was to import meshes not created in SIMSCALE. I look forward for a feature that addresses this to be available, I can tell that the GUI is made with incorporating such kind of things in mind.

exactly - currently, you can not merge or combine different meshes in SimScale. I see that your current issue is that you can not combine “local element size” / “entity refinement” with “Inflate layers”. That’s in fact a current limitation of the tetrahedral mesh generation right now. In fact this is something that is part of the current improvement of the meshing user experience and capabilities (as discussed over here: Your opinion needed: Mesh operation type naming ). So I’d recommend watching that thread over there, as there will be more discussions on potential improvements soon.